I tried copy/pasta but the article is long, difficult to to embed all images/links of which there are many.

Here is a TL;DR:

Quote:

Among the core self-identified purposes of JTRIG are two tactics: (1) to inject all sorts of false material onto the internet in order to destroy the reputation of its targets; and (2) to use social sciences and other techniques to manipulate online discourse and activism to generate outcomes it considers desirable.

Mind blowing article with so many implications. Unfortunately this gives more credibility to people calling "shill" with everyone they disagree with. But it turns out that there are such agents actively manipulating opinions in online forums. The slides he shows even mentions some of their tactics such as using: confirmation bias, disinfo, slander, anchoring, priming, social penetration theory, attention control, etc.

In any case, they are the views of the author Sustein who is now on the NSA oversight panel. Based on what he wrote in his paper, I would infer that he would be ok with the tactics of JTRIG which were identified in the Original Post (OP).

Or, considering that the other seven times it's mentioned in the paper, it is referring to extremists, this one case was just an oversight?

Quote:

Originally Posted by planetdoc

In any case, they are the views of the author Sustein who is now on the NSA oversight panel. Based on what he wrote in his paper, I would infer that he would be ok with the tactics of JTRIG which were identified in the Original Post (OP).

You are aware that JTRIG is part of British intelligence, right? Not US.

__________________I think the young people enjoy it when I "get down," verbally, don't you?

Or, considering that the other seven times it's mentioned in the paper, it is referring to extremists, this one case was just an oversight?

that would be a question for Mr S.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

You are aware that JTRIG is part of British intelligence, right? Not US.

yes, but the document referenced were marked for US as well as other countries participating in the "5 eyes." It has been shown that that 5 eye countries work closely together and coordinate activities and information on behalf of one another.

Its hard to believe that the US government is not participating in similar operations based on the fact that they tried to procure such technologies in 2011, and the NDAA of 2013 essentially authorized propoganda within the US borders. Also the document referenced were on NSA servers accessible by Booz Allen Hamilton.

yes, but the document referenced were marked for US as well as other countries participating in the "5 eyes." It has been shown that that 5 eye countries work closely together and coordinate activities and information on behalf of one another.

Its hard to believe that the US government is not participating in similar operations based on the fact that they tried to procure such technologies in 2011, and the NDAA of 2013 essentially authorized propoganda within the US borders.

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't share SIGINT, ELINT and HUMINT with our allies?

Quote:

Originally Posted by planetdoc

what would that be?

A person who believes that "the official story" of 9/11, that Islamic terrorists acting under approval from al Qaeda leadership hijacked and crashed four US airliners on 9/11/2001, is not true. Some of these people argue that it couldn't have taken place without the US government being aware of it at the minimum and that perhaps was "in on it" at the maximum.

__________________I think the young people enjoy it when I "get down," verbally, don't you?

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't share SIGINT, ELINT and HUMINT with our allies?

nope. Share away. The more people who have access to it, the more likely that illegal activities (if there are any) will be leaked to the public.

As U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis said,

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brandeis

Publicity is justly commended as a remedy for social and industrial diseases. Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants; electric light the most efficient policeman.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

A person who believes that "the official story" of 9/11, that Islamic terrorists acting under approval from al Qaeda leadership hijacked and crashed four US airliners on 9/11/2001, is not true. Some of these people argue that it couldn't have taken place without the US government being aware of it at the minimum and that perhaps was "in on it" at the maximum.

As a physician, I believe in the idea of "informed consent." This essentially means that my job is to share knowledge with my patients, who are of sound mind, and that they have the autonomy to make decisions regarding their care.

In the same regard, I believe that the American Public should have access to information so that they can come to their own conclusions. That is not possible with the indefinite classification of information.

Some of that order states that information cannot be classified simply to prevent embarrasement to the government. Unfortunately, those rules are not fully followed since we learned that Rahinah Ibrahim was put on the 'No Fly List' due to a paperwork mistake, and that the government tried to keep her on the 'No Fly List' and keep the documents regarding it secret and classified for the only reason to prevent embarrasement to the government.

We also know that the whole concept of "State Secrets Privellage" was based on a lie in United States vs Reynolds in 1952 in which the government said revealing documents regarding a B-52 bomber crash would reveal military secrets. Only in 2000 when the documents were unclassified did the american public know that there was no "military secrets" and that the only reason for classification was to defraud a suing widow. The report showed a compendium of witness statements and expert findings that indicate a number of mistakes and errors led to the crash.

Thus, I dont think it is appropriate for the government to be able to keep documents classified for 50 or more years. Classification of documents should be far more limited. Documents should also not be destroyed before the public has an opportunity to see them even if it embarasses the government (such as about torture).

The american people should have timely access to documents so that they can come to their own decisions regarding 9-11, The Gulf of Tonkin Incident or other events, and not have to simply believe an "official story."

I clearly answered. I dont have all the information necessary to make an informed decision regarding 9-11. Only when all information relevant to the event is unclassified and available to the public will I be able to make an informed decision that I feel will be accurate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

Anyway, just for the record, you don't know that our government (or our allies) are doing what the thread title states, correct? You just suspect.

For the record, Based on the info presented in the OP, I DONT know that the US goverment is 'infiltrating the net to manipulate, deceive, and destroy.' I do know that they attempted this with mainstream media in Operation Mockingbird. I suspect that they are doing it based on all other information available (i.e. where there is smoke there is fire.)

For the record, I DO know that US Allies, specifically the UK are doing what the thread title states. Documents provided in the original article clearly prove that.

I clearly answered. I dont have all the information necessary to make an informed decision regarding 9-11. Only when all information relevant to the event is unclassified and available to the public will I be able to make an informed decision that I feel will be accurate.

What classified information about 9/11 are you referring to that precludes you from having an opinion?

Quote:

Originally Posted by planetdoc

For the record, Based on the info presented in the OP, I DONT know that the US goverment is 'infiltrating the net to manipulate, deceive, and destroy.' I do know that they attempted this with mainstream media in Operation Mockingbird. I suspect that they are doing it based on all other information available (i.e. where there is smoke there is fire.)

For the record, I DO know that US Allies, specifically the UK are doing what the thread title states. Documents provided in the original article clearly prove that.

Good.

Where in those documents do you see proof that the UK is doing what you claim they are?

__________________I think the young people enjoy it when I "get down," verbally, don't you?

I clearly answered. I dont have all the information necessary to make an informed decision regarding 9-11. Only when all information relevant to the event is unclassified and available to the public will I be able to make an informed decision that I feel will be accurate.

What a bullshit cop-out. What's your gut tell you? A patient's life doesn't depend on it--just say what you think. Was the Bush administration involved in carrying out the 9/11 attacks or not, in your opinion?

Third District Republican Congressman Walter Jones has joined Massachusetts Democrat Stephen Lynch calling for the release of additional documents related to the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

The two filed a resolution urging the Obama administration to declassify 28 pages of a joint investigation by the House and Senate intelligence committees.

Lynch said the 28 pages "contain information that is vital to a full understanding of the events and circumstances surrounding this tragedy" and that the family of the victims and the American people deserve a full accounting of the events.

It seems that the Congressman dont believe that the American people are getting a full account of the events. Without a full account, one cannot accurately disern the validity of the "official story."

“There are significant inconsistencies between the public statements of the FBI in September and what I read in the classified documents,” Graham said.

“One document adds to the evidence that the investigation was not the robust inquiry claimed by the FBI,” Graham said. “An important investigative lead was not pursued and unsubstantiated statements were accepted as truth.”

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

Where in those documents do you see proof that the UK is doing what you claim they are?

The fact that the agencies working for the UK government are claiming they are doing those activities are enough. These are claims by official state actors, and thus should be held to a higher standard than NGOs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cosmo20002

What a bullshit cop-out. What's your gut tell you? A patient's life doesn't depend on it--just say what you think. Was the Bush administration involved in carrying out the 9/11 attacks or not, in your opinion?

It would be sickening and enraging for the US government to carry out an attack against the American people such as 9-11. I hope that is not the case. It would be something I wouldnt want to believe. My "gut" will be tainted by those hopes.

Most physicians refuse to treat loved one for serious illness so that their emotions dont taint their decision making regarding medical care. I want to make opinions on facts, not on my emotions or guts. I am waiting to see all the facts.

You do realize that no government is EVER going to give the GP access to all of its secrets, right? If so, it seems rather odd (and perhaps rather convenient) that you won't make a decision on 9/11 without them. For me, I've yet to see any evidence or proof that 9/11 didn't happen exactly as the commission said it did.

Quote:

Originally Posted by planetdoc

The fact that the agencies working for the UK government are claiming they are doing those activities are enough. These are claims by official state actors, and thus should be held to a higher standard than NGOs.

Where did they claim they were/are doing what you say they are doing?

__________________I think the young people enjoy it when I "get down," verbally, don't you?

It would be sickening and enraging for the US government to carry out an attack against the American people such as 9-11. I hope that is not the case. It would be something I wouldnt want to believe. My "gut" will be tainted by those hopes.

Most physicians refuse to treat loved one for serious illness so that their emotions dont taint their decision making regarding medical care. I want to make opinions on facts, not on my emotions or guts. I am waiting to see all the facts.

Are you suggesting that you have all the facts required for you have an opinion about the OP?

__________________I think the young people enjoy it when I "get down," verbally, don't you?

You do realize that no government is EVER going to give the GP access to all of its secrets, right?

no. I dont expect all information to be unclassified immediately, but I expect it to be unclassified eventually. I hope that it is unclassified in a timely manner.

Once again, Obama has stated he is against indefinite classification and so does his executive order.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

If so, it seems rather odd (and perhaps rather convenient) that you won't make a decision on 9/11 without them.

why is that odd? Notable politicians have stated that the US public is not getting all the information regarding 9-11 based on what they have seen in classified sections of the the 9-11 report.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

For me, I've yet to see any evidence or proof that 9/11 didn't happen exactly as the commission said it did.

ignorance is bliss.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Donger

Where did they claim they were/are doing what you say they are doing?

In the GCHQ slides shared in Glenn Greenwald's article which is linked in the OP. He shows a slide to back up each of his assertions. If you have difficulty understanding than I would suggest you ask your questions in the commentary section of that article. I am confident He or one of his readers can help answer your questions.

as I said in the OP:

Quote:

I tried copy/pasta but the article is long, difficult to to embed all images/links of which there are many.

I dont think it would be appropriate or wise for me to embed all the images in this thread. I am definetly not going to do it to continue your ad nauseum and circular arguments.